Jump to content
The Uniform Server Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About Minute

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Previous Fields

  • Main OS
    Windows XP
  1. BBoard stands for Bulletin Board, doesn't it?
  2. Ahhh... junctions You can't use those to replace subst (creating a whole drive instead of a folder), can you? There is also no DLL you can add which would make it compatible with Windows 9x, right? Hmm... why are you saying that we have to test it on every system and different situations? You keep talking about wasted development time which could be spent on more important features. What are those features? Well, this is just a server and not an operating system, why there are so many features to implement is beyond me. An important feature that Olajide wants to implement now is the one-file start/stop system for the core components and plugins. As Olajide has stated earlier, he hasn't been able to find anyone proficient in Windows C++ coding to do that for him. So, as you can see, development time isn't really a problem at the moment, it's the lack of programmers! Anyway, Olajide has taken apart the components many times, I doubt it would take him much time and for the testing of it, we have a beta testing team to help with that (although most of them seem to have disappeared ). To sum it up, I don't see why you keep bringing up the wasted development time argument. I just can't see how that is "wasted". I also believe that there isn't an infinite amount of tricks you can make an Apache, Perl, PHP and MySQL package do that people would actually want and that is in the ability of the current developers to do. Well, I guess I'll end my rant here, I won't say anything about the size after this. But maybe as an experiment, you could make a stripped down version and see the number of downloads that gets compared to the full version. That's the only way to see which approach is limiting, limiting here as in limiting the amount of users that will download the server. Of course, there are other definitions of "limiting", however doesn't everything have a limit? As far as I know, you're the first one to say that making it small is limiting. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this point. There are servers that are big and servers that are small enough to even fit on a floppy disk, which is better? None, both have their own purposes. If I have offended you in anyway, I offer you my apologies. The posting of your modification here has already helped us overcome a limitation, the limitation of choice. Now our users can choose to get the Uniform Server or your Uniform Server++ P.S. The Uniform Server is under a BSD(-like?) license, the LICENSE.txt can be found in the docs folder
  3. I was waiting to see what Ric would say We can see a couple of attention differences showing up in this thread, in the assumptions of what the end user would think of the server. Ota is concerned for the more experienced users and says that making the server more standards compliant will make them happier. While Ric says that users just want something that works and don't care about how the server is built. Well, what can I say? No one is "built" to pay attention to the same things But then again, I don't think anyone really cares about that, so... I'll keep my mouth shut now
  4. Ota, I think one of the main reasons people were attracted to the Uniform Server is because of its size. So, why do you think keeping the size small is limiting the project? Besides that, I can also remember some parts of Perl (at least PPM which is included with ActivePerl) that required registry entries to function properly. Here's a suggestion, as you said above, your structure changes would make it easier to update the components of the project. So, maybe you could do a small release with only the essentials (I think if you follow the file list of Uniform Server, you'll get a working server), and then you could write some BAT files to fetch the official releases of the components (there are official ZIP builds for all of them except Apache, I think), unzip them and then move all the necessary files to their respective folders. In other words, your server comes with stripped down versions of the components and then you offer BAT files to download and upgrade them into the full version. I know that's probably a lot of work, and I'm not saying that you must do it, it's just something to keep in mind if you get users who want the small size of the Uniform Server with the changes of your Uniform Server++. Here's another suggestion (that's hopefully not so much work to implement), I was thinking about what to do with the /home directory today and thought of those user-specific directories (those prefixed with ~), maybe you could use /home for that However, from another perspective, it looks like adding unnecessary complexity into the server, what do you think about this? Another thing, about the PATH environment variable, do you think it is possible to remove the unnecessary entries, and just leave it with WINDOWS, WINDOWS\system32 and the server directories? Lastly, I mentioned installing Apache and MySQL as Windows services because I was wondering if your server structure would cause problems with that. As you said, we should plan ahead. So, maybe when you've found the time, you could check to see how the structure changes you made affect the installation of Apache and MySQL as services, just in case you get that as a feature request. Yet again, I'm not saying that you should make them installable as services immediately, just make sure that when you decide to do that, you don't have to change the server structure again
  5. What DLL errors? Is it because you moved them into a different directory?
  6. Nice work, Ota The /srv directory is a good idea, I like it. It's a good thing that you didn't decide to fork the project, Olajide doesn't like it when people do that I have a question, are you familiar with Linux? I hope you don't mind if some of this reply sound a bit unrefined as I'm very excited about your post and couldn't wait to write a reply I see that you have done a lot of changes to the file system structure, here are some things that I would love to discuss: The udrive directory is subst'ed as W:\, that's why it's a subdirectory. Do you think putting the *.bat files in W:\ is a good idea? From what I know, / is the primary hierarchy, /usr the secondary hierarchy and /usr/local the tertiary hierarchy. You have placed the doc, src, and sbin directories in the secondary hierarchy. However, the main programs are still in the tertiary hierarchy.Should the doc directory be moved into /usr/share/doc, which is for architecture-independent data? Should the sbin be moved into /sbin and the httpd.exe and mysqld.exe into /usr/sbin instead? (Considering that the files in /sbin are essential to get the server up and running; and the daemons should be in /usr/sbin) Should php.exe and perl.exe be moved into /usr/bin? [*]I have always wondered about the htpasswd directory, do you think it's necessary? I think httpd.conf already has protection for the .htaccess and .htpasswd files. [*]Should the tmp directory be /tmp (which isn't preserved between restarts) or /var/tmp (which is)? [*]Should the mysql directory be /var/lib/mysql instead? (/var/lib is for data that programs modify while they run) [*]Should ssl.crt be in /var, as far as I know that file isn't modified frequently, so can it still be considered variable data? [*]Finally, the /home directory, what do you think we should use this for? I don't think the plugins belong there, they should either be in /opt (in this case, their config files should probably go into /etc/opt and their variable data into /var/opt) or /usr/local. You mentioned the PATH environment variables, do you think extending them would work? At this forum, you can see problems about the server not running because of an incompatible version of libmysql.dll, do you think we should change the order of the PATH environment variables so that it checks /var/lib first? About the file size, the goals of this project is to keep the server no more than 8MB when compressed (although it could be changed in the upcoming version 4.0). Besides, do we require all the MySQL files to run MySQL properly? Don't we already have phpMyAdmin as our MySQL client? How about the Perl libraries? I don't think all of them are needed to run CGI programs properly. Lastly, what do you think about running Apache and MySQL as Windows services and do you have any plans to include a mail transfer agent? How about an FTPd?
  7. Have you edited the .htaccess file?
  8. Have you installed anything into the DocumentRoot, W:\www?
  9. Which page are you trying to access? What does the error log say?
  10. Hi, Ric. Have you got your hard drive fixed? By the way, do you think it is possible to compile SlimFTPd with LCC?
  11. I don't think Olajide has released 3.6 and as far as I know, there won't be one. However, Sourceforge is now working again and you can get 3.5 there EDIT: Upon re-reading this, I realized that someone could've misinterpreted what I said above as "the project is dead", but, no it isn't, Olajide and Ric are working on version 4.0. As for "why the big version jump", I'll let Olajide explain it this time
  12. Isn't that [bolded text] IIS spelled in full? Ric has posted a method to disable IIS here.
  13. How do you crash Apache and what do you do to loose the explorer window (or are you talking about the command window closing by itself)?
  14. Minute

    A first

    You were both online at this forum, right?
  15. Minute

    Error with PERL

    /me never thought Uniform Server would come with outdated modules
  • Create New...